Re: [FFmpeg-devel] The "bad" Patch

["softworkz ." <softworkz-at-hotmail.com@ffmpeg.org>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of softworkz .
> Sent: Donnerstag, 29. Mai 2025 04:59
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] The "bad" Patch


Two and a half days have passed and nobody has answered any of the questions
from my previous post. This speaks for itself.

What really happened, is that some had seen my use of system() and 
since this is commonly known as a "dangerous" API when not used carefully,
they did lazy judgement without due diligence and without detailed 
assessment.
The judgement was based on commonplace knowledge instead: 
system() => is-bad => patch is bad


Looking at the specific case and way of usage (and how system() works
internally) would have revealed that this doesn't apply here. 

=> The patch was NOT bad at all
=> All review comments were addressed when it was pushed

(the second part is evident anyway)



More Facts
==========

Patches 1-12 had no issues.
Yes, patches 13 and 14 had minor issues - but nothing more.
(You think these were big issues? Let me know and I'll collect a list
of issues in commits that you have pushed and which weren't 
all perfect).

In 2025, I have 42 commits in total, no issues came up for any
others. It's 89 commits in total, the first one from 2016. It's not 
a huge figure, but I'm in no way new to FFmpeg.

Some had alluded that I wouldn't have a track record of more 
"complex" patches. Indeed, many of those that I have in public 
ffmpeg are smaller ones (but by far not all trivial). 
In addition, there are still two really complex examples to look at:

1. The first 9 commits by 'Artem Galim'. That was about adding D3D11 
   support for QSV on Windows. 95% of that is code that I had 
   written and used 2.5 years before already and eventually handed
   over to Intel.
   (can be proven in several ways)
   
2. Subtitle Filtering Patchset
   Even though it didn't get merged (it was about nits, not quality), 
   many are using it and I regularly get mails asking for a rebased
   version. Also, it is running on a number of machines all over 
   the world, which has a lot of zeros.


Why am I writing all this?
==========================

Because the only reasonable way to counter defamation like it had
occurred is providing facts.

And one of those facts is that there was no bad patch!

(to be continued)

Best regards,
sw

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".